Arnold is a Big Burly "Bad Behaver"

I would hardly characterize this as splitting hairs. I'm not commenting on whether Clinton was guilty of sexual harassment, and I'm certainly not saying that because it's his word against their's, they must be lying.

But here's the difference: Clinton's accusers say he did something which he completely denies. You can take your pick of whom you choose to believe but there is no solid evidence to support either side. But Arnold's accusers say he did something which he obviously did do. That's why he's not denying it. It's never really been a secret that he behaves this way.

The problem is that Arnold describes his behavior as playfulness which may have accidentally offended. If a man cannot see how groping women without their permission could be "offensive", then he has a serious misogyny problem. Because he's such a huge star he has gotten away with all kinds of boorish behavior. And all along he thought he was a fun-loving, jocular fellow making everybody laugh on set with his kooky antics, not realizing that he was leaving a trail of humiliated women behind. That kind of behavior may be par for the course for a movie star, but people have a right to know if their potential governor has such a fundamental disrespect for women.

 

I can't tell you how many times I've succumbed to that temptation.

Clinton actually lost weight while in office. I can't lose weight at the gym.

 

Re: Arnie..a politician. Someone is pulling my plonker!

Arnie's finger will never be over the big red button. He can never be president.

 

Clinton's got a sexual harrassment lawsuit settlement to his credit. What's Arnie got? When this story was originally reported by Premiere magazine (and that story's author should be calling his lawyer) two years ago, many people came out in Arnold's defense. Leaving a trail of humiliated women behind? Nice.

If a man can't see what's wrong with playing sex games with an intern half his age, while he's the President of the United States, then he has a serious misogyny problem. So, they both do. The fact that you want to see it differently belies your supposedly substantial "outrage".

 

Just for fun



I would like to point out that this is a joke and I in now way mean to imply that Arnold is Hitler.

 

Re: Re: Re: Arnold is a Big Burly "Bad Behaver"

Sexual assault? Leave Bill Clinton out of this.

 

Ouch. Demos, care to have another whack or you going to call it a day?

TWUB - it's good to have you back.

 

You make a good point - Clinton's settlement in that suit is an admission of guilt, even if he claims it was just to settle the matter and get past it. However, just because no charges have been filed against Arnie doesn't make these accusations less true. Have you ever heard of a powerful Hollywood figure being sued for sexual harassment? It doesn't happen - and I can ASSURE you it's not because there's no sexual harassment in Hollywood.

And if you published an article saying that Kevin Spacey is gay, many people would come out and tell you how many women they've seen him make out with. And if you published an article saying that Scott Rudin abuses his assistants, many people would come out and claim he was a loving father/mentor to them. It reveals a lot more about Hollywood than it does about the individual or the accusations.

I am not excusing Clinton's behavior. But I do maintain that there's a crucial difference between consensual and nonconsensual sexual acts.

 

Oh please. Any halfway decent lawyer could bat TWUB's brutal attempt at logic out of the park.

Start with looking up the term "consenting adults", then move on from there.

 

Dude, have you ever heard of Juannita Brodderick or Kathleen Willey? From your comments, I'm guessing no. Try a Google search sometime.

 

That's super. I'm sure it's happened to a few producers out there. And I'm also sure the threat of a lawsuit handles much of that in Hollywood, in the form of mediations and the like. What does this have to do with anything?

And President Clinton had his defenders as well. That's the point.

Obviously. But there were similar allegations (and worse) levelled against Clinton. Nonconsensual allegations. But you'll see a difference where you want to see it. It's called partisanship, no matter how much you try to spin this into a "women's issue".

 

Any halfway decent mouth-breather would also realize we're not in a court of law, and this isn't a legal proceeding.

Goodbye, Mr. Spalding!

Try reading the thread again, Corky. Namely, the point about how there were non-consensual allegations levelled against Clinton, too. Several, actually. But, surprise, surprise, you've chose to ignore those.

 

I was thinking this as I started work today. I imagined a day without the politics forum and no recall talk for me.

I come in for a visit and made the mistake of reading this thread. I want to add my 2 cents, but will hide out until after this is all over. I will not be able to make any change, so I think it best not to spin wheels today.

Later dudes...

 

Think of the Saturday night live and other shows scits that will get if Arnie is elected. Arnie's opponents are against comedy.

 

You really have a problem with objective criteria like truth and law, don't you? Only if we lived in your parallel universe would your citation carry any relevance. But even there it wouldn't be funny.

The LAT for reported information that, IF TRUE, satisfies the elements of sexual battery. 15 women have now risked career suicide and defamation suits from a very powerful man. FIFTEEN. But you don't care.

You'd rather the voters not know.

As to the timing, do you think for an instant this issue is going away should Arnie win? Congratulations on your stillborn governor.

 

You know full well I never said agreement with anyone bears upon the quality of one’s exercise of citizenship. But I did say that honesty does. You deserve your citizenship. You just suck at exercising it.

“Irrelevant accusations.” Wow. Fifteen women publicly accuse the California gubernatorial candidate of conduct meeting the statutory definition of sexual battery. But ArgentineSoccerFan think it’s irrelevant.

So you piss and moan about the LA Times for having the temerity of actually reporting these “irrelevant accusations”. I realize you have difficulty with the concept, but an informed electorate is a GOOD thing. And voters determine relevancy. No you, not me, not the LA Times. If it’s indeed irrelevant, the voters will discard the allegations and Arnold has legal redress if his character is indeed defamed. You have ZERO evidence of political motivation by the LA Times, but that doesn’t prevent you from implicitly accusing the Times and the FIFTEEN alleged victims of LYING. I have no problem with a news service reporting, you know, NEWS. But obviously you do.

How could one ever have a “serious discussion of the issues” with a Schwarzenegger backer? Do you have exclusive access to his policy positions? Your man has given you almost nothing to advocate. All you could possibly do is make it up as you go along like you usually do. I'll save time and call your bulll**** right now.

And throw all the dirt you want at Davis. I really don't care. Much of what we call “dirt throwing” is necessary. Problem is, you cry like an Argie forward when you aren’t doing the tossing.

I merely cited the allegations and the relevant code. If you don’t like it, take it up with your shrink.

 

Arnold's Enron Secret

http://www.alternet.org/story.html?StoryID=16902

Here's the story Arnold doesn't want you to hear. The biggest single threat to Ken Lay and the electricity lords is a private lawsuit filed last year under California's unique Civil Code provision 17200, the "Unfair Business Practices Act." This litigation, heading to trial now in Los Angeles, would make the power companies return the $9 billion they filched from California electricity and gas customers.

It takes real cojones to bring such a suit. Who's the plaintiff taking on the bad guys? Cruz Bustamante, Lieutenant Governor and reluctant leading candidate against Schwarzenegger.

Now follow the action. One month after Cruz brings suit, Enron's Lay calls an emergency secret meeting in L.A. of his political buck-buddies, including Arnold.